Gaming PC cpu query

[CalumGiff]

OK so i currently have two buils set up one of them is on the am3+ socket with an fx 8320 processor and the other is an intel 1150 socket with an i3 4160 processor. The computer will be used specifically for gaming and im kinda on a budget. I know the 1150 gives me more room for upgrade in the future for moving to an i5 or something similiar.

 

Which will do me best in a gaming computer?

 

The i3 is currently £90 on amazon and the fx 8320 is currently £103

[ZetZet]

i3 will outperform the fx in games most of the time. What builds exactly do you have in mind? Generally you can squeeze in i5+h81 for the same price as fx8320

 

The i3 will give you better or equal performance the majority of the time. If you play a lot of RTS games such as Civ 5 and Starcraft you probably want the 8320 since the extra cores really help on CPU dependant games like those.

fx is absolutely dreadful at starcraft

[flibberdipper]

I would still say go with the i3 PC so you have an upgrade path.

[mark201200]

OK so i currently have two buils set up one of them is on the am3+ socket with an fx 8320 processor and the other is an intel 1150 socket with an i3 4160 processor. The computer will be used specifically for gaming and im kinda on a budget. I know the 1150 gives me more room for upgrade in the future for moving to an i5 or something similiar.

 

Which will do me best in a gaming computer?

i3

[CalumGiff]

Thanks guys the i3 build comes out as £20 or so cheaper than the fx 8320 one and yeah i do like having the upgradabilty for later on down the road.

[ZetZet]

I've always been told the extra cores are beneficial for RTS games. I never bothered to really research it though lol, but that's a possiblity.

starcraft likes strong cores. 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-processor-frame-rate-performance,3427-8.html

[CalumGiff]

Will the i3 processor severely bottleneck idk a r9 290? thats the kinda price range im buying my gpu in.

[david cassar]

Will the i3 processor severely bottleneck idk a r9 290? thats the kinda price range im buying my gpu in.

Depends on what games you're going to be playing.

[CalumGiff]

For example lets say bf4 will the difference caused my the i3 be monumental or only a few fps

[david cassar]

For example lets say bf4 will the difference caused my the i3 be monumental or only a few fps

It handles a gtx 780 so I don't think its gonna bottleneck that much. If it does don't forget that you can use mantle and alleviate the bottleneck all together

[zappian]

The i3 is faster than the 8320.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8427/amd-fx-8370e-cpu-review-vishera-95w/3/

 

Even on bf4

 

http://www.hardcoreware.net/intel-core-i3-4340-review/3/

[i_build_nanosuits]

It handles a gtx 780 so I don't think its gonna bottleneck that much. If it does don't forget that you can use mantle and alleviate the bottleneck all together

love to see my videos linked like that! ...please should be noted that the settings in this video if you check carefully the GPU renders at max anti-aliasing and 110% scalling...very demanding GPU settings...and this is a ''fake'' i3 that was given access to more cache than the real i3 has onboard (difference is VERY minimal though this should not be considered i'm just mentionning it...but the GPU settings defenetly consider this as ULTRA + settings)

 

OP, from my testing the i3 is nice most of the times and will not really limit the performance of the GPU in MOST games...now if you start trowing demanding open world games at it such as assassin's creed unity or dragon age inquisition for example yes the CPU is pinned and it will severely limit the performance of such a GPU (GTX780 and R9 290 perfoms about the same) but so would ANY AMD FX CPU including the FX-9590 even...therefore if you go with such an high-end card you probably want to consider something like an i5-4440 as a minimum CPU instead of the i3.

 

The i3 would be a great match for an R9 280 or GTX770 GPU for example...more than that and the CPU will be the limiting factor probably too often for your likings..

[Jack.EXE]

I always found it hard to recommend an i3 over something like the Pentium AE (deff not a believer of hyperthreading) or even an i5-750

 

Edit:

 

Look what I found! exactly what you need!

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Core-i5-SR00D-2-8GHz-i5-2300-/351288426276?pt=AU_Components&hash=item51ca6bff24

[i_build_nanosuits]

I always found it hard to recommend an i3 over something like the Pentium AE (deff not a believer of hyperthreading) or even an i5-750

 

Edit:

 

Look what I found! exactly what you need!

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Core-i5-SR00D-2-8GHz-i5-2300-/351288426276?pt=AU_Components&hash=item51ca6bff24

why would he want an old cpu like that?

also no the pentium is not a good option for gaming, you should believe in hyper-threading because when it comes to gaming no overclock can make the pentium perform like an i3 does in most games...

here's my video test of the pentium, CPU is at 4.5ghz...GPU loads and FPS are all over the place, lots of stuttering, many games on this video are unplayable even on low settings:

 

 

As you can see a game like battlefield 4 run,s worlds better on a 3.4ghz core i3 than it does on a 4.5ghz pentium (and many pentium just can't clock any higher than 4.2ghz...those chips ended-up in the poor bins for a reason many of them are bad clocker this has been reported a lot on this forum everyday a new one come in here saying : ''my pentium won't overclock a shit, i can't play many games because they refuse to even launch and when they do i get a lot of stuttering i should have bought a real CPU in the first place now it's 70$ in the trash''

[WaitForMeImOnDialUp]

the i3 is the better choice because of upgrade path, but in battlefield 4 the 8320 would outperform it all day. in multiplayer maps especially 64 player that i3 would dip left and right all the way down to a crawl if paired with a 290 or better.

 

sure it does great in single player games, and games made for a couple cores.

 

It handles a gtx 780 so I don't think its gonna bottleneck that much. If it does don't forget that you can use mantle and alleviate the bottleneck all together

how many players was that map?  although it did okay  but with a 780 your fps should have been way higher. i even seen you dipped down to the 30's there. an 8320 would be much less of a bottleneck in that game.

[i_build_nanosuits]

how many players was that map?  although it did okay  but with a 780 your fps should have been way higher. i even seen you dipped down to the 30's there. an 8320 would be much less of a bottleneck in that game.

64 players and look at the settings this is with 110% scalling and full AA this is why the FPS are lower...

For purely BF4 (and BF4 ONLY!!) yes the FX 8 core CPU is a stronger performer...but it tanks real hard in way to many games and it cost a lot more if you consider the whole platform to run an FX like that for me to recommend such an old cpu to anybody at this point in time...the FX 8 core CPU would have to be 109$ and come with a 990FX motherboard in the box for it to be worthy of my recommendation.

[WaitForMeImOnDialUp]

64 players and look at the settings this is with 110% scalling and full AA this is why the FPS are lower...

For purely BF4 (and BF4 ONLY!!) yes the FX 8 core CPU is a stronger performer...but it tanks real hard in way to many games and it cost a lot more if you consider the whole platform to run an FX like that for me to recommend such an old cpu to anybody at this point in time...the FX 8 core CPU would have to be 109$ and come with a 990FX motherboard in the box for it to be worthy of my recommendation.

 

yes the i3 is a better choice for all around gaming (i'd recommend the i3 4360) .

fx8 does very well in bf4 and dragon age inquisition because of mantle and the fact those are amd sponsered games.

i would recommend the i3 simply because it will do a great job for now and later a i5 can be added to destroy every game there is.

[i_build_nanosuits]

yes the i3 is a better choice for all around gaming (i'd recommend the i3 4360) .

fx8 does very well in bf4 and dragon age inquisition because of mantle and the fact those are amd sponsered games.

i would recommend the i3 simply because it will do a great job for now and later a i5 can be added to destroy every game there is.

yes, also when i come to think about it i also happen to have some ''tweaking'' done in the nvidia control panel to improve image quality in BF4 and this cost some frames as well...

also if youre interested i have videos recorder with the FX cpu as well on my YT channel...i think only BF4 though sadly

 

The core i3 is not the end all be all of CPU's when it comes to gaming, far from it...but for it's pricepoint it can't be defeated by anything right now...of course if at all possible my recommendation goes to an i5-4460 and a cheap H97 motherboard.

it's worth saving some more for the core i5.

[D3MON]

The i3 is faster than the 8320.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8427/amd-fx-8370e-cpu-review-vishera-95w/3/

 

Even on bf4

 

http://www.hardcoreware.net/intel-core-i3-4340-review/3/

(from second link) 99% of the time it isn't

and listen to what @i_build_nanosuits is saying.

[zappian]

 

 

(from second link) 99% of the time it isn't

 

Average fps are higher however.

 

And that game is VERY amd optimized using multiple cores/threads.

 

They are pretty neck in neck at least.

 

In games that arent less core optimized the i3 destroys  the eight core .

 

Games like ac IV and skryim.

[i_build_nanosuits]

Average fps are higher however.

 

And that game is VERY amd optimized using multiple cores/threads.

 

They are pretty neck in neck at least.

 

In games that arent less core optimized the i3 destroys  the eight core .

 

Games like ac IV and skryim.

Correct, if i would play only BF4 (well i pretty much always play bf4 but still ) i would still run my FX-8320 it was a great performer in that game...but i tend to play a lot of single player FPS and action games and the FX was a let down for me in too many of those great games...and when you happen to have paid like nearly 500$ (at the time) for a GTX 780 GPU you can't stand low GPU loads and poor minimum FPS in just about any games you play so i just HAD to do something about it...i picked my car and drove south to the nearest micro-center (boston) and grabbed a combo.

[D3MON]

Average fps are higher however.

 

And that game is VERY amd optimized using multiple cores/threads.

 

They are pretty neck in neck at least.

 

In games that arent less core optimized the i3 destroys  the eight core .

 

Games like ac IV and skryim.

Average fps are higher however.-minimums are as important if not more important than average, higher averages are smoother sure but severe drops ruin gameplay and immersion, this is widely known.

 

"that game is VERY amd optimized using multiple cores/threads." I think you mean "that game is amd optimized using multiple cores/threads". god hate a developer for doing his job and making a good looking game on a well designed and feature rich game engine which uses more than 1 core (no matter what cpu you have) when all we really want is more cod AW, unity, watchdogs, and peggle...

[Faa]

Average fps are higher however.-minimums are as important if not more important than average, higher averages are smoother sure but severe drops ruin gameplay and immersion, this is widely known.

 

"that game is VERY amd optimized using multiple cores/threads." I think you mean "that game is amd optimized using multiple cores/threads". god hate a developer for doing his job and making a good looking game on a well designed and feature rich game engine which uses more than 1 core (no matter what cpu you have) when all we really want is more cod AW, unity, watchdogs, and peggle...

Here you go;

Can I get a nice explanation why the 9590 does worse in a game you advertised as a 8-threaded game at 5GHz/350W than a 3GHz/50W dual core?

[D3MON]

Here you go;

Can I get a nice explanation why the 9590 does worse in a game you advertised as a 8-threaded game at 5GHz/350W than a 3GHz/50W dual core?

why is the 4360 worse than a 4330?

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/292885-is-my-monitor-bottlenecking-my-gpu/

resolution->gpu bottleneck possibly making it game engine/cpu limited again.

[Faa]

why is the 4360 worse than a 4330?

Why is the 6350 worse than the 4350? Might as well just ask why the 9590 is 1% better than the 4350 in a "8-core" optimized game. Answer my original question.